No way, I thought Cyclone were a spec, the horror.
Anyway.
The thread called for reworking cyclone.
What could the ones opposed to it have done?
Giving out points, bring discussions into certain reworks of their spec, talked about any kind of nerf on Cyclone that wouldnt break it or make balance/feral completely useless.
Theres ALOT of ways people could have discussed about it, but because they have nothing to really put as a “defense” they rather just say “nothing wrong with it” or try the “history says nothing is wrong with it” and apparently “RSS representation shows theres nothing wrong with it” which later got changed magically to “look at tournaments, nothing wrong with cyclone.”
The meaning of discussions is to… discuss about potential changes and how things could look like. Even if the title could be “aggressive” there are ways to talk about it without looking down on ppl who do not agree with your personal view.
i mean sure i take something like dark pact, coil and port if cyclone works like fear. But is that really good game design if we make all specs the same?
rephrase it. Idk what answer you expect.
and i still dont see any issue with it. If i see an issue with something i need to explain first WHY it is an issue and strengthen my arguments with actual numbers or facts.
There is not a single argument based on numbers or facts why cyclone should be “reworked”.
i already said boomy was too good because of precog, owlkin adapt haste and the 30% healing/dmg debuff after every clone. They nerfed all these 3 and since then boomy isnt overperfoming anymore according to ANY statistic.
Dont put words in my mouth i did not say.
3s, shuffle and tournament statistics is just the best metric for identifying overperforming specs. If you have better metrics please tell me.
??? if you claim cyclone needs to be reworked its your duty to give arguments/statistics that favor your claim.
the spec itself has plenty of counterplay its low range and being able to interrupt it.
There was still not a single argument on why the SPELL Cyclone itself needs to be reworked.
actually cba discussing about this topic here anymore. There are topics like this everyday where people want other specs/talents to be nerfed because of their own incompetence.
No. If you are so adamant about not nerfing clone as a whole, how about we bring back fear to tbc version where it didn’t break on DMG and you could 100-0 someone during cc chain? Because affli or destro or whatever is so bad right now I demand tbc fear back.
And you prove my point, looking at a single spell like Fear and saying it should not break on DMG or should break faster or slower is stupid. You don’t look at a single spell and make decisions. You look at the whole class and spec that uses fear.
To be able to say how fast Fear should break you need to look at the classes that have Fear, you need to look at existing talents that can increase the DMG threshold, you need to take into account the pace of PvP and the duration of fights.
You just perfectly proved my point mate. If you just look at Fear (a single spell) and ignore everything else, you’ll end up with bad class design and for example Fears working like stuns for Warriors. Blizzard did not look at Warriors when they made the Fear changes and we already have Warriors that use their Fear as an almost stun.
Think before writing, cause let me repeat again you gave the best example why “Just looking at a single spell is dumb and ends up with bad class design”.
Cyclone is only obnoxious when it’s from Feral Druids because all of the stuns and roots into Clone they do. If you think Clone from Boomkins and Rdruids are obnoxious then you’re doing something wrong.
Was my question. If a “nerf to 5 sec” would been some kind of problem, is there a reason druids didnt complain during 10.0 about it?
I know you came from your direction of OPs post, but that was not my argument.
Cyclone was not a problem when it were 5-5.2 sec duration.
Your belief is that representation proves if a spell or skill is a problem.
First it was RSS. Then it became not RSS but tournaments because rogues came into talk so RSS didnt fullfill your reasoning anymore.
I personally never said it should work like fear. Any changes to Cyclone is up to discussions if there is any need for it. You have yet to actually give a good reasoning beyond “Nothing is wrong, just counter bro” which can also be applied to rogues then.
Thats for you personally. You basically are like Whisperer in that sense, you believe theres nothing wrong, you ignore what ppl write and just say its “nonsense” instead of talking on why its not a problem.
But the only “its not a problem” is due to representation.
“If its so OP why isnt more abusing it !!!”
Yeah, so dont nerf sub rogues at all. No changes is needed since not enough ppl are abusing it. Tournaments dont affect you at all. All it can do is indicate but it wont tell you why.
I looked back at what you wrote before. Its not me “putting words in your mouth”.
If you would have even considered it to be “an issue” you would have called boomies more than just “S tier”. If something is broken, its higher.
Was one of your quotes early in the season. Cant remember if you wrote anything about when moon buffs were in before they nerfed it after quite awhile.
Statistics wont tell you if “cyclone” is too strong.
Representation wont tell you if a skill or spell is too strong otherwise I guess everyone at the top have a spell or skill that needs to be changed since thats whats breaking it and not just numbers.
If you want discussions about potential changes to a skill or spell you dont outright have to give statistics to prove your point of forcing it.
“These are the reasons why that would be a bad idea and this is the only real change that could happen without making it worthless/useless even if I dont see a reason why” could have been a good point on your side. Instead its representation and nothing wrong.
You mean arguments you dont agree with so they dont exist.
Then dont discuss? If you have issues discussing about something in a good way, then its always better to just ignore it and move on. The likelihood of any of the discussions on the PvP forum to ever be put into the game is next to 0.
Sometimes its just not worth it
You do because some spells are so inherently broken, for example current cyclone, that any fair balancing is impossible unless this broken spell gets toned down to a reasonable level.
Blizz did same thing to double tap. They completely removed it which allowed them to somewhat balance MM hunters more fairly.
I’ve said this so many time before - nerf cyclone and give the specs a buff to compensate. Make cyclone a choice not a must. Get rid of these multiple talents stacking that make cyclone even stronger.
Funny, somehow you take issue with me disagreeing with his correction, because “it’s half” correct, but somehow you don’t take issue with him correcting me with “half correct” information.
Where was your reasoning when he said it isn’t 3 yards, but rather 5 ?
Kinda demonstrates that it isn’t about correct information with you at all.
He said the talent altered the range.
You said 3.
He said 5.
You outright denied the 5 like it didnt even exist since its “wrong information” while claiming:
instead, there had to be 2 ppl who dont even play druid who had to explain how Astral Influence works for different specs.
One can be misinformation and be explained. It being either 3yards or 5yards is quite easy to misinform based on what spec you main and dont touch the others.
But outright denying it claiming its wrong entirely is another story. Then you should already be fully aware of the situation surrounding it.
Both are “correct” depending on what spec you argued about. This were purely about Cyclone which means both are “Half correct”. The difference is just one hard denying that fact and the other simply just said “5yards”.
What the hell are you talking about? I don’t take issues with anything. I just pointed out that were at best half correct when you overconfidently and kinda arrogantly claimed having been correct.
I don’t care about your evaluation of my person and do not wish to be harrassed.
You were claiming it’s 5 yard instead of 3, clearly that was incorrect from Feral example. I called you out.
